will not negotiate on a bill to fund the government. the white house said that the president is willing to yoe negotiate with the republicans if the threat of default is lifted. good to see you brett, so it is still a stalemate. i find it interesting that these press released came out almost instant ta instantaneously. expect the president to come out and make some sort of statement. we don't know how long that will be. and then he is expected to take some questions. you are right. the sides are pretty much digging in. and the question really is, will there be some get negotiation

and what is it that they hope to accomplish with that? >> it seems that the republican gained leverage with this shutdown because the debt ceiling loomed on october 17th. and the president said today i'm not going to negotiate with you unless you end this shutdown first. >> it is a bit of a see man tick here. that is the sound byte that gets picked up all over the country. it comes from senator read and senator obama. the house speaker has turned that around and said we need to talk and give me a call. when you ask people about the two sides getting together and talking about things that is popular. you still have this talk about stand off and the republicans holding the government hostage. but, there is some at least according to the polls, par are

ody now while republicans are getting blamed more in most polls there is blame rebounding to democrats as well. >> you have to wonder when the pend y pendulum shifts. but as we move more into this week and the debt creels looms. never in the history of this country has a president not negotiated on a debt ceiling? what happens to that? >> republicans point back to president clinton who negotiated on the debt ceiling and numerous times it is filled with those who negotiated on this thing. never has the congress threatened to go over that line and default. senator obama voted against it. the question i guess is, if he

knew that the votes were on his side would he have still voted that way. because the result the actual vote then was 52-48 when he voted against it. if the vote was the other way around would he have threatened default? >> we talked about the technical term and what it means with tax revenues coming in and the expenditures going out. most people on wall street don't believe it is a good thing to push up against this deadline or to go over it and that is the leverage that we are dealing with now. >> no doubt, stay tuned and stand by if you will, while you continue to wait for the president to come out of the white house. who is live in that very room. so the president, a little delayed here almost four minutes late.

do we know where he is and what time he is coming out. >> we expect him in a moment so. brett is right and they have been there for weeks. there was a tiny glimmer of home when white house staffers opened the door to a two week or three week extension to extend the debt ceiling for a couple of weeks. the president said he is not going to ne negotiate that. does the president build on what his staff did on that yesterday. the president and his remarks suggest that there is a way on both sides. is it two weeks a month or six weeks. so far, nobody has found that road out of what it looks like a dead end. >> in my mind the buck is going to stop with the president of

the united states as that debt ceiling approached us on october 17th. they are not going to stop this shut down now. they have done it for 8 days, right? >> republicans have gone far down this road. you have heard the head of the republicans congressional group saying state governors have to balance their budgets and he was demanding this morning that the president lead the way out here. when you look at that abc news washington post poll it was suggesting that sure the blame is being spread around. republicans on the hill are getting more blame. 7 in ten americans saying they disapprove of the way that they handle it. so there is pressure on them in addition to them being pressured on the president.

>> no doubt. speaking of polls though, i believe we can throw up the latest poll, with regard to the debt ceiling, 58% of the american public, how would you vote on raising the debt limit, they say they are against it and 57% in favor. does that work for or against the president. it might make it harder that you can continue to increase the debt ceiling so that we are not coming back every six years. somebody has to come up with a way to move forward. he said he has put a budget on the table and the republicans say they have the paul ryan budget on the table. both sides saying we have our plan and nobody wants to work together. if the american people are saying why are you continuing this cycle of debt, at some point the pressure is going to be on both sides.

>> what do you expect him to actually say today? he says he is going to take three to four questions, who will he call on? >> that is the big question. i think we can expect him to build on what he said yesterday when he went to the fema headquarters. he has classified it as a republican shutdown. use that go phrase to say the blame lies with them and the work of the government has to go forward. so we can expect him to build that case. i think we can look for beyond the blame game, what is going to be new and different to suggest that he is offering something. that phone call with speaker at 10:45 am eastern. it was the president calling and saying, i'm not going to negotiate under the threat of default.

john boehner hasn't moved his position either in fairness there. will he say something new and different to offer some way forward. >> stand by. as we continue to await the president. in the meantime, national security correspondent njennife griffen is live at the pentagon. do you expect the president to talk about what is happening in somalia? >> i expect him to take questions about the al qaeda suspect who was grabbed in libya. how long can they hold him onboard that u.s. navy ship. and under what law is he being held and what law will allow him to keep ter gating him for that suspect for a long as possible. but there is another issue that has come up in the last few moments here at the pentagon.

that is a horrible impact that is happening on the fablimilies those who were killed. we have learned that the pentagon has not allowed to pay deathbenefits to those who have been killed over the weekend. the military want to know why can't their families be given that $100,000 money that helps families get through this difficult time. also those family members are not being flown out to dover to meet those caskets when they return. the president should be asked about this. it is one of the most horrific examples that we have seen as a result of the partial government sh shutdown. >> we wonder if the house will continue to take this up.

they continue to pass small probe rati appropriations bills. do you suspect this will gain attention? it is already getting national media attention and it is outrageous. i hear in the hallway here this is not right. you don't do this to the families of those who were killed to the families of those killed in afghanistan in their time of mourning. the president likely to be asked about it. will harry reid allow the legislation to be passed? so far he has not been able to do so. this is an example of family members suffering because of this partial shutdown. >> bring us up to speed on the al libi terror situation and the benefit that you believe this

administration has in the fact that this guy is alive. as opposed to a lot of the al qaeda oprytives that were taken out and kills ed in the last fe years. >> the president made it clear that he wanted to move away from using drones. drones, you don't get to inter row gate the suspect. the president got rid of them and the real question is, how long can they keep this prisoner al libi top al qaeda operative onboard this navy ship. they don't like to be in the detention business.

the before has not liked to use guantanamo bay and the president saying he wants to put him on trial in new york. how long before they start jeopardizing that trial in new york? remember, this is somebody al libi who wrote the book, the manchester manual which was found in his apartment which was found in the 1990s. >> thank you so much for that report. we have received the two minute warning. and here is shep smith reporting from the news desk. >> we are 8 days away from the partial government shut down. he was supposed to be on a trip

to asia and he cancelled that trip so that he could stay at home and be on top of all of this. the tick tock of what has happened today is this. speaker bsaid i'm ready to talk about this. and then minutes later the president said there will be no negotiating. we will be happy to talk about anything but that is after the shut down is passed. unless and until we get past this point we need to talk about this. they could put forth a bill to end all of this. the republicans say they are not sure that is such a bad idea. from polls released today it seems that everybody is mad

about this today. 63% are mad at republicans in congress and full 53% say they are mad at the president of the united states for not getting the business of the country down. so many are hopeful now the next 9 days before we get to the next 9 days of the government not getting ready to pay it's bills yet. the money has been spent. now it is a matter of whether the government is going to pay the bills. historically a lot of times, they have been tied together. let's hear what the president has to say now >> good afternoon everybody. i'm eager to take your questions i'll try to be brief. >> this morning i had a chance to speak with the speaker and i told him i'm happy to talk with him and other republicans about anything. not just issues i think are

important, but also issues that they think are important. but i also told him that having such a conversation, talk, negotiations, shouldn't require hanging the threat of a government shoutdown or economic chaos over the heads of the american people. think about it this way. the american people do not get to demand a ransom for doing their jobs. you don't get to call your bank and say i'm not going to pay my mortgage unless you throw in a new car or an xbox. you don't get to say let's talk about the price i'm going to pay and if you don't give me the price i'm going to burn down your house. that is now how it happens in business and how it happens in private life. in the same way members of congress and the house of

republicans in particular don't get to demand ransom. two of their jobs are passing budgets and making sure that america is paying it's bills. they don't get to say unless you give me what the voters rejected in the last election i'm going to cause a recession. no american president would deal with a foreign leader like this. most of you would not deal with co workers or business associations in this fashion and we shouldn't deal with it here in washington. i have heard republicans say this is reasonable. but as i have said before, imagine if a democratic congress threatened to crash the global economy unless republicans agreed to background checks or

reform. i think it is fair to say, that was not appropriate. let's lift these threats and let's get down to work. it is not like this is a new position i'm taking here. i had the other leaders in just last week. either my chief over staff or i have had serious conversations on the bunl dget more than 20 ts since march. what we haven't been able to get are serious positions from the republicans that would allow us to actually resolve core differences and they have decided to run out the clock until there is a government shout down or possibility of default thinking that it would give them more leverage. that is not my characterization that said that was their strategy from the start.

and that is not how our government is supposed to run. it is not just me by the way who has taken the position that we are willing to have conversations about anything. senate democrats have asked to sit down with house republicans and hash out a budget but have been rejected by house republicans 19 times. at the beginning of this year the speaker said they wanted regular order and a budget process. so the senate and house should pass a bill and then a committee hashes out their differences and that is what the democrats did. but somewhere along the way house republicans said they wouldn't appoint people to the committee to try to gauche jneg and 19 times they rejected that. after all of that the democrats in the senate still passed a

budget that effectively reflected republican budget levels just to keep the government open and the house republicans couldn't do that either. the point is, i think not only the white house, but also, democrats in the senate and the house have shown more than ample willingness to talk about any issues that the republicans are talking about. but we can't do it if the entire basis of the republican strategy is we are going to shut down the government or cause economic chaos if we don't get 100% of what we want. my answer to the speaker is stop the excuses and take a vote. put people back to work, there are enough reasonable republicans and democrats in the house who are willing to vote

yes that the budget that the senate has already passed. that vote could take place today and the shut down could be over. and serious negotiations could proceed. now, as soon as congress votes to reopen the government. it has also got to vote to meet our country's commitments and pay our bills. raise the debt ceiling. as reckless as a government shut down is, would be worse. i want to talk about it for a minute. even though people can see and feel the effects of a government shut down there are people that don't believe that default is a real thing. default would not be a big deal.

if congress refuses to raise the debt ceiling. america would not be able to meet our financial obligations for the first time in 225 years. and because it ais called raising the debt ceiling americans think it is raising our debt. it is not. it does not add a dime to our debt. it says you paid for what congress has authorized america to purchase. whether that is the greatest military in the world or veteran's benefits, whatever it is, what this does is make sure that we can pay those bits. now the last time that the tea party republicans flirted with the idea of default, two years

ago, the market plunged, america's credit rating was downgraded for the first time and i decision to go through with it and permit default according to many cea's would b insane, catastrophic, chaos, and warren buffet likened it to a nuclear bomb. it would disrupt markets and undermine the world market and it might permanently increase our borrowing concepts which would mean it would be more expensive to add for deficits and debt. there is nothing responsible for that. releva

preventing this should be simple. raising the debt ceiling is a lousy name. they don't like to vote on it. but it does not increase our debt. it does not allow for a single dime of increased spending. it allowed for the treasury department to pay for what congress has already spent. but, as i have said. it is a tough vote. people don't like doing it. although it has been done 45 times. nobody has seriously threatened to breach the debt ceiling until the last few years. and this is our word and our good name. this is real. and the government shut done millions faced hardship in a economic shut done.

every american could see their 401 cave and home values fall. and student loans rise and there could be a significant risk of a very deep recession at a time when we are still climbing our way out of at worst recession. the american people have fought too hard and too long from wuon crisis only to see one precipitate another one. the good news is over the past three rand a half years, new businesses created new jobs. we cut the deficit in half. it is coming down faster than any time in the last 50 years. america is poised to become the number one energy producer this year. this year we are pro duducing m

oil than we are importing. but the uncertainty caused by one week has reconsidered businesses to think about hiring and seen mortgages held up by thousands of home buyers not sure about the economic situation. and all of this adds to it. we can't afford these manufactured crises every few months. as i said, this one isn't about spending or budgets. our deficits are falling. the budget that the senate passed is at republican spending levels. it is their budget just to make sure that the budget was open. and what happened the way we got

to this point was one thing and one thing only and that wasp republic denying health care to millions of people. and that law ironically is moving forward. so, most americans democrats and republicans agree that health care should not have anything to do with keeping our government open or paying our bills on time. which is why i will sit down and work with anyone of any party. not only to talk about the budget, i'll talk about ways to improve the health care system. ways to shrink our health care deficits and help the middle class and research and development. there are a whole bunch of things that i want to talk about. in terms of making sure that everyone is getting a fair shake

in this society and building our middle class. and by the way, i put forward proposals in my budget reforms for our taxes and help us invest in new jobs and produce our dev its. and these were originally republican proposals. so i've shown myself willing to go more than half way. in these conversations and if reasonable republicans want to talk about these things again, i am ready to head to the hill. i'll even spring for dinner again. but i'm not going to do it until the more extreme parts of the republican party stop forcing john boehner to issue threats about our economy.

we can't make extortion routine as part of our demdemocracy. and this is not just for me. they shouldn't have to pay ransom for me. we have to put a stop to it. the last point i'll make. already this week i had to miss critical meetings in asia to promote american jobs and businesses. as long as we get this fixed when ever we do these things, it hurts our credibility around the world. it makes it looks like we don't have our act together. that is not something that we should welcome. the greatest nation on earth shout not get permission to keep our government open. let's pass the budget and end

this government shut down and avert an economic shut down and let's focus on what is good for the american people because they know we have a lot of work to do. with that i'll take a couple of questions. >> if congress has passed a clean cr bill those may be short-term methods, if that happens is your over to negotiate still stand in the weeks that they passed measures that are perhaps six weeks or two months long? >> absolutesly. what i have said is that i will talk about anything. what will happen is we won't agree on anything. the truth is, is that the parties are pretty divided on a bunch of bis issues right now.

voters are divided on those issues too. i recognize that there are some house members where i got clobbered in the last election. and they don't get plickly rewarded a lot as seen as negotiating with me. and that makes this harder for divided government to come together. but i'm willing to work throw those issues. the only thing that our democracy can't afford is a situation where one side says unless i get my way and only my way unless i get concessions before we start having a serious give and take i'll threaten to shut down the government and threaten to not pay america's bills. so, i will not eliminate any

topic of conversation and i've shown myself willing to engage all of the parties involved every leader on every issue. >> and that is plies no matter how long the time frame is? >> the only thing that i will say is we are not going to pay a ransom for america paying it's bills. that is something that should be non gauchable and everybody should agree on that. one of the most valuable things that we have is america's credit wort worthiness. >> this is not something that we should come close to fooling around with. we should test it out. let's take default out for a spin and see how it rides. and i say -- imagine in your

private life, if you decided that i'm not going to pay my mortgage for a month or two. first of all you are not saving money by not paying your mortgage. you are just a dead beat. and you can anticipate that will hurt your credit. which means that in addition to debt collectors calling you are going to have trouble borrowing in the future you are going to have to borrow at a higher rate. what is true for individuals is true for nations. if we are creating an atmosphere in which people are not sure whether or not we pay our bills on time, that will have a severe long-term impact on our economy. and on america's standard of living and that is not something that we should be in a

conversation about. that is not something that we should be moving as lev ranerag. okay juliana goldman. >> if we were to get to that point would you prioritize and pay bond holders first rather than social security and how would you make that determination? >> i am going to continue to be very openful that congress does not continue in that position. they will set that potential scenario. i do know that there have been some who said, that if we just

pay bond holders people who bought treasury bills that we won't be in default because those interest payments will be made and to them, what i have to remind them is, we have a lot of other obligations not just people who pay treasury bills. we have senior citizens who are counting on their social security check on time. we have companies who are doing business for our government and military that have payrolls that they have to meet and if they do not get paid on time they may have to layoff workers. all of those folks are potentially effective if we don't pay our bills on time. what is also true is if the market is saying we don't pay our bills on time, to boil this

down to personal examples, if you have a mortgage and a car note and a student loan that you have to pay, and you say i'm going to pay my mortgage but not my student loan or my car loan. that is going to have an impact on your credit. andp at minimum, they are going to charge a higher interest rate. that is what would happen to you if you made those decisions. the same is true for the federal government. we are exploring all tingesys. i know that the secretary of the treasury will be appearing before congress on thursday and he can address the additional details about this. no option is good in that scenario. there is no silver bullet. there is no magic wand that

allows us to wish away the chaos that could result if for the first time in our history we don't pay our bills on time. when i hear people trying to downplay that, i think that is irresponsibl irresponsible. it is particularly funny, coming from republicans who claim to be champions of business. there is no business person out here who thinks this wouldn't be a big deal. not one. you go from wall street to main street and you ask a ceo of a big company. they will tell you it aa big deal. it would hurt. and it is un-necessary. that is the worst heart of heart

part of it. there is no reason why, if in fact republicans are serious about wanting to negotiate. wanting to have a conversation and wanting to talk. there is no reason why you have to have that threat looming over the conversations. think about it, the only reason the republicans have held out on negotiations up until the last week or so, is because they thought it was a big enough deal that they would force unilateral concessions out of democrats and out of me. they said so. they said the president is so responsible that if we hold our breath and say we are going to threaten default, then he will give us what we want and we won't have to give anything in return. you can read statements from

republicans who said this. and so for them now to say it wouldn't be a big deal if it happens, that is not how they have been acting. why would i give them concessions now? >> it is a big deal. nobody should be getting concessions for making sure that the full faith and credit of the united states. >> sam stein? >> thank you, mr. president. when the speaker -- what assurances can you give to those affected by a shut down who are concerned about a longer impact and -- >> well, i mean you are making an important point which is what we are asking of the republicans right now is to keep the government open at funding levels that democrats think are

very harmful to the economy and in adequate to make sure that the economy is growing faster and more people are put back to work and the middle class is growing. we are willing to pass at least a short-term budget that opens up the government at current funding levels. it doesn't even adroaddress thet has zardos been does because of sequestration. and head start programs, and va programs and a whole range of things that have been heart hit this year. but we recognize that there are

going to have to become prom ices between the democrat and republican positions. so, let me give you an example. very specific. because of sequestration and the meat cleaver cuts, thousands of families have lost head start slots for your children. you have had parents who have been trying to figure out how can find descent quality child care for my kids. the government shoulddown means several thousand more are going to be losing their slots. if we vote today or tomorrow or the next day. the house of representatives to go and reopen the government. those several thousand people

will be spared where your kid is going to be when you are trying to go to work. but it doesn't solve the broader problems. the democrats will say let's solve the bigger problems. but they aren't making those demands right now. we are saying don't hurt more people while we are trying to resolve these differents. >> excuse me? >> absolutely. roberta? >> you talked a bit about the hint of credibility around the world. i'm wondering what you are and administration are telling foreign leaders who are calling and asking about whether the

united states the is going to avoid defaulting on its debts. >> i won't disclose specific conversations. i say the united states has always paid it's bills and it will do so again. they are looking at not just what i say they are looking at what congress does. that is up to speaker john boehner. we are not going to calm cred creditters until they see the dpom government reopened and authorization of the treasury to pay our bills on time. and until then there will be a cloud over u.s. economic credibility. but it is not one from which we can't rekefr. every democracy has tussles over

the budget and i think most world leaders understand it. what you haven't seen before, i think from the vantage point from world leaders is the notion that one party in congress might blow the whole thing up if they don't get their way. they have never seen that before and that does make them nervous. particularly in what happened in 2011. we saw what happened in 2011. the assumption was that american people must have learned their lesson. and when they hear members of the senate and congress saying maybe default wouldn't be that bad. i bet that makes them nervous. it makes me nervous. it should make the american people nervous.

that is irresponsibility. it is out of touch with reality. it is based on a flawed analysis of how our economy worked. >> you cannot pay some bills and not others and think that the fact that you are paying some bills can protect you from a loss of credit worthiness. >> do you think you might have emergency powers that you can use? >> we have used a lot of our emergency powers. jack lu has used measures to pay our bills over the last several months. but those powers run out. and the clock is ticking. and i do worry that republican ares but also some democrats may think that we have a bunch of

other rabbits in our hat. there comes a point where the treasury, we do not have enough money coming into pay our bills on time. if it is straight forward and i know there has been discussion about my powers under the 14th amendment to ignore the debt ceiling law setting aside the legal analysis. if you start having a situation in which there is legal controversy about the u.s. treasury's authority to issue debt. the damage low pressuwill have . it will be tied up in litigation for a long time.

the strategies that the people have thought. or you know he can resort to some other constitutional measure, people ignore that what matters is what are the people who are buying treasury bills thing? again, i'll boil it down in personal terms. if you are buying a house and you are not sure whether the seller had title to the house, you are going to be nervous about buying it. and you would want a much cheaper price. to buy that house because you won't be sure whether or not you are going to own it. most of us would walk away. most of us would say the last thing i want to find out is after i bought it that i actually own it.

the last thing is true. here i am sitting here, what if there is a supreme court case deciding that this aren't valid, that these aren't valid legals government to pay me on it. i may not purchase them and i may ask for a big premium. so there are no magic bullets here. and congress going in and vote and the fact that right now there are votes i believe to go ahead and take this drama off the table should at least be tethered. the speaker keeps saying he doesn't have the votes for it. and i say put it on the floor and let every member of congress be on record.

let them vote to keep the government open or not. and they can determine where they stand and defend that vote. and let them vote on whether or not america should pay it's bills or not and if in fact some of these facts believe that it is not that big of a deal they can vote no. and that will be useful information for voters to have. if it fails and we ent up gend g defaulting voters should know who voted. >> the campaign finance case. citizens united -- i wonder if you could weigh in on this case. >> it would go further than

citizens united. >> it would say anything goes. there are no rules in terms of how to finance campaigns. there aren't a lot of functioning democracies around the world that can work this way. where you can have millionaires and willion airs bank rolling who ever they want and however they want in some cases undisclosed. and it means that ordinary americans are shut out of the process. and you know i had to raise a lot of money for my campaign. so, i -- there is nobody who operates in politics who has perfectly clean hands on this issue. but what is also true is that all of us should bind ourselves to some rules that say the people who vote for us should be more important than somebody who

is spending $100 million to help us get elected. because we don't know what their agendas are. i united contributed to some of the problems we're having in washington right now. you have some ideological extremists who have a big bank roll and they can entirely skew our politics, and there are a whole bunch of members of congress right now who privately will tell you, i know our positions are unreasonable, but we're scared that if we don't go along with the tea party agenda or some particularly extremist agenda, we'll be challenged from the right. and the threats are very explicit. so they toe the line. and that's part of why we have seen a breakdown of just normal routine business done here in washington on behalf of the american people. and all of you know it.

i'm not telling you anything you don't know, because it's very explicit. you report on it. big chunk of the republican party right now is -- are in jerrymandered districts where there's no competition, and those folks are much more worried about a tea party challenger than they are about a general election where they have to compete against a democrat, or go after independent votes, and in that environment, it's a lot harder for them to compromise. mark. >> thank you, mr. president. this week, the president of china has visited several of the asian countries you were going to visit and had to skip because of the shutdown. he has taken a big role at the regional submit, both of which your administration has made a pretty big priority of as part

of to the broader asian pivot. does chosen benefit from the chaos and washington? and you said this hers the reputation of the united states overseas. are there specific things you can point to where you already have seen some damage, and one that occurs to me is the trade deal you tried to do in asia. the leaders today announce they still want to wrap it up but no longer are able to say they want to wrap it up the end of this year. had you been there do you think you could have gotten that additional input? >> i think that's a great example. we don't know but it didn't help i wasn't there to make sure we went ahead and closed a trade deal that would open up markets and create jobs for the united states, and make sure that countries were trading fairly with us and -- in the most dynamic, fastest growing market

in the world. i should have been there. but i can tell you, because i had to apologize to some of the host countries, that they understood that the most important thing i can do for them and the most important think i can do for the bilateral reputation is to make sure we re-open the government and don't default. i don't think it's lasting damage. like i said, if we deal with this the way we should, then folks around the world will attribute this to the usual messy process of american democracy but it doesn't do lasting damage. in the short term, i would characterize it as missed opportunities. we continue to be the one indispensable nation. there are countries across asia

who have welcomed our pivot because they want to do business with us, they admire our economy, our entrepreneurs. they know that their growth is going to be contingent on working with us. they care about the security environment that we have maintained, helped maintain and the freedom of navigation and commerce that is so important to them. so, it's not as if they've got other places to go. they want us to be there, and they want to work with us. but in each of these big meetings we have around the world, a lot of business gets done, and in the same way that a ceo of a company -- if they want to close a deal, aren't going to do it by phone. they want to show up and look at somebody eye-to-eye and tell them why it's important and shake hands on a deal. the same thing is true with

respect to world leaders. and the irony is, our teams probably do more to organize a lot of these multilateral forums and set the agenda than anybody. we end up being engaged much more than china, for example, in setting the agenda and moving this stuff forward, and so when -- it's almost like me not showing up to my own party. i think it creates a sense of concern on the part of other leaders, but as long as we get through this they'll understand it and we'll be able to, i believe, still get these deals done. the last point i'd make, though, is we can't do it every three months. all right? back in the '90s we had a government shutdown. that happened one time, and then after that, the republican party and mr. gingrich realized this

isn't a sensible way to do business. we shouldn't engage in brinksmanship like this, and then they started having a serious conversation with president clinton about a whole range of issues and got things they wanted. they had to give the democrats some things the democrats wanted. but it took on a sense of normal democratic process. so, here we already went through this once back in 2011, and then again last year, right after my election, we went through something similar with the so-called fiscal cliff, where republicans wouldn't negotiate about taxes despite the fact that taxes actually went up anyway, even though they refused to negotiate. they could have gotten something things from us they wanted if they had been willing to engage normal negotiations.

so we have to keep -- stop repeating this pattern. i know the american people are tired of it. and to all the american people, i apologize you have to go through this stuff every three months, it seems like. and lord knows i'm tired of it. but at some point we got to kind of break these habits, and get back to the point where everybody understands that negotiations there's give and there's take. you do not hold people hostage or engage in ransom taking to get 100% of your way. you don't suggest that somehow a healthcare bill you don't agree with is destroying the republic. the grand socialist scheme. if you disagree with certain

aspects, let's work on it. if you're concerned been long-term debt that a good thing. but don't pretend as if america is going bankrupt at a time when the deficits have been cut in half. that's what the american people expect, is just stability, common sense, give and take, compromise, those aren't dirty words. there's nothing wrong with them. and i think the american people understand, i may not -- i may -- i have flaws. michelle will tell you. one of them is not that i'm unwilling to compromise. i've been willing compromise my entire political career. and i don't believe i have the answers to everything, and it's my way or the highway. but i'm not going breach a basic

principle that would weaken the presidency, change our democracy, and do great damage to ordinary people, just in order to go along with what the house republicans are talking about. >> one followup? >> ask specifically about china, and i'm wondering whether it's our loss, their gain? >> you know, i'm sure the chinese don't mind that i'm not there right now. in the sense that there are areas where we have differences, and they can present their point of view and not get as much of a pushback if i were there, although sect of state kerry is there and i'm sure he's doing a great job. but i've also said that our cooperation with china is not a zero sum game. there are a lot of areas where the chinese and us agree. on trade in particular, though,

here's an area where part of what we're trying to do is raise standards for, for example, international -- intellectual property protection, which sometimes is a big problem in china, and if we can get a trade deal with all the other countries in asian that says, you got to protect people's intellectual property, that will help us in our negotiations with china. richard mcgregor. >> can i go back to the privatization. what are the legal liabilities liabilities, -- have to be paid -- the sovereign credit -- >> i'm going to let jack lew, the secretary of the treasury, make a formal presentation on thursday before the senate committee, because this is obviously sensitive enough, and i think people would be paying close enough atten